A Collection of Essays
by Kenwaydynasty
Summary: A list of ideas on various games (and hopefully other media) which I hope would inspire somebody to create them in the future.
1. Chapter 1: How to fix AC3 Part One

How to fix Assassin's Creed 3

Foreword

Before I begin, I want to add a small section right here. This essay was started almost a year ago by me to get rid of the ideas rattling around my head. However, after the first thousand words, I just ran out of steam. As such, it lay here untouched until now when I saw an announcement for a re-mastered release of Assassin's Creed 3. This brought the ideas back and as such has made revisiting this necessary. As of writing this, I am still unsure of whether it is false advertising, but regardless of that, I am still writing it for myself. If anyone from Ubisoft does notice this and heeds my suggestions; all the better. I would ask for no credit, as it is simply nothing more than some ideas by a fan. Having said that, I do refer to other sources, so if you borrow ideas from there, give credit where credit's due.

Introduction

To be honest, Assassin's Creed 3 was the first Assassin's Creed game I 'properly' played, in the sense that I completed with 100% synchronization in almost every mission, sat through every cut-scene and slaved through the collectables, underground missions and other side missions.

I truly enjoyed the game, except for a few occasions when I hated it. At times, it seemed that the game could do no wrong but at other times, some technical glitch or poorly scripted sequence made me wonder how the game was ever released in the first place.

I had read reviews before about how it was one of the best games on the franchise with a gaming magazine even awarding a full score (the only other time I recall such a thing happening was in their reviews for Dead Space 2, Elder Scrolls V, Portal 2 and Bayonetta) and on the other side, respectable review sites giving complaints about the bugs and rabid Ezio fan-boys and fan-girls bashing the character, story and anything else they could think of regardless of veracity.

Both sides have their reasoning which I can agree with to an extent and yet they are both wrong in many different ways. This is my opinion of the matter and instead of howling about how it did everything wrong or about the potential wasted, this is an essay focusing on what it did right, where it failed and on how the failures could be avoided or fixed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I respect all views (except for radicals and fan-boys and fan-girls) so I would like to present what I hope is a reasonable 'soft-reboot' or even a 're-mastered and revised' edition of the divisive AC3.

Review (what it did right and where it went wrong)

The game as a whole is a milestone in innovation of the franchise; from the proper introduction of Naval Combat (the Da-Vinci mission in AC2 doesn't really count as it is barely 1 mission with little variation in control from using a Gondola), the hunting mechanic, a greyer storyline, an antagonist whom people can actually like, the environment between cities being more than just padding and serving as the foundation stone for the Kenway family stories and the New World stories.

However, the game tends to overuse the mechanisms from the previous game as a crutch which instead of supporting the game, tends to cripple it. To list a few; wanted posters, the economy-crippling amount of money which can be earned, the overabundance of side-quests (whose idea was it to use an Assassin as a letter courier?) which have little or nothing to do with the game and serve mainly as padding, the thief-guilds and fight-clubs (Boston Brawlers, but who really cares?) who look like they have been duct-taped to the game and the collectibles like feathers which serve no real purpose. When the game tries something original, it tends to be successful (most of the time) and yet by copying ideas from the Ezio trilogy which sounded unique at the time, it degrades the quality of the game.

Also, I can't avoid the elephant in the room, the game's problem with pest control. Until the release of Unity, AC3 was arguably the most bug-ridden game in the franchise. It should have been a warning sign to the developers of Unity, but instead, Unity turned out to be the warning sign for Origins and so on and on. Better late than never, right? It can be said that the game needed the level of polish which say... Blizzard delivers on its products, so here is are some suggestions on where Ubisoft can apply it. It's on the house.

Story (Tweaks and revisions)

As a whole, I'm glad that I played the game. It gave me a lot of good memories and some poignant ones too, and yet I have to admit that the sloppy execution did mar the experience and I have to admit that the personal investment necessary in the game wasn't really present in most missions except for the drive to complete it.

For example; let us compare any death scenes of a known character in Assassin's Creed 3 to that of any other game. To put it bluntly, it doesn't hold a candle to a scene like, say, the opening of 'The Last of Us'. It does hold up in its own franchise, especially Kaniehtí:io's death which is on par with anyone in the Ezio trilogy though it is not up to the mark of Ezio meeting Altaïr at the end of Revelations. Seriously, watch it on YouTube.

watch?v=hw86GANf8mw

Again, upon continuing with the example, rather than following the protagonist as he swears vengeance against the people he believes to be responsible, something which is relatable and understandable, it tries to throw in as much Revolutionary War plotlines as humanly possible. Hey developers, it's all fine to nod towards the setting, but it's even better for the environment and missions to do that. Leave the stories for actual storytelling.

It could have continued with the protagonist turning to the creed as a means to an end, only to learn along the way about matters like compassion and empathy and devoting oneself to a higher nobler cause. This would have been a great story and if it sounds familiar, it is because it is more-or-less the plot of AC2.

As such; probably in order to avoid being derivative (can't confirm that, but it's a good enough reason), the people at Ubisoft changed the plot from that to a grittier version of the plot of the original Star Wars trilogy.

There's a video on YouTube which can explain it better. Watch it.

watch?v=UFlTbRfqL1s).

It is commendable for them to try something new, provided that if it was well executed and that's a big 'if'.

The opening

The story starts by introducing the story via. an exposition dump, and it's a big one. To use the previous example, we didn't need to know Joel's backstory in the opening of 'The Last of Us', the fact that he is trying to save his daughter and the excellent acting made us engaged and invested enough to do so. When they mention 'ancient aliens', evil pharmaceutical companies and devices which can let you see through time in less than two minutes, it's hard to keep a straight face (we are here to watch a historical, virtual re-enactment of Colonial America, not an episode of 'Ancient Aliens').

The other games kept it minimal, by barely mentioning it in the opening or by hinting at it indirectly via cut-scenes while focusing on what is happening at the moment (AC1 is an exception but it is given some leniency, being the starting game and all). As the background is revealed throughout the games, it becomes believable as we are experiencing it more-or-less from the character's point of view. In the game itself, whatever background material is revealed by Achilles and Juno in just two conversations each is more than enough. When I played the game, the 2012 Solar flare wasn't something I really cared about as there was no emotional investment in the modern world seeing how the high-and-mighty William Miles removed any chance of character development among the modern trio (Desmond, Shaun & Rebecca) and himself via his exposition dump, spoon-feeding their entire motivations rather than letting us find out for ourselves. I did care about whether Ratonhnhaké:ton saved his village but that was side-lined in what was basically a jewellery hunt. It tried to redeem itself in the end but due to Ubisoft cutting out the ending (that is another topic which infuriates me), that chance is lost as well.

After ranting for two paragraphs about the opening, I should point out that the opening mission, outside of giving us the instructions seemed mostly pointless. It is the connection it has to Haytham Kenway and Duncan Little and the plot McGuffin which stops it from being completely useless.

The first ship mission, on the other hand, is. It is the equivalent of playing the opening mission of the first HALO, but instead of being a marine, you play as a super-soldier disguised as a janitor who has to clean up the base. Your character may be awesome, but unless you are doing something with the character, it doesn't really count. People may point out that at least the mission during the storm was exciting, I would counter by saying; you are on a ship, and you can't sail it. I repeat you are just a passenger. It is the most interesting element of the game, and you can't be a part of it. I could do most of what the mission offers and more just by going on a cruise.

Haytham's later missions are generic but enjoyable. The pesky guards may restrict the environment but the increased difficulty did make for a satisfying challenge. As we finish Haytham Kenway's memories, people might rant about how much time was wasted here, but I do have to admit, that the story twist made it worth it. Not only was that twist done right, but by seeing someone who is basically a British Ezio, both newcomers and old would have started getting attached to him and so the moral greyness of the story here is further accentuated.

After that, we get a brief narration from Kaniehtí:io explaining the origins of Ratonhnhaké:ton which is then followed by him reading what appears to be his father's diary, a potentially important narrative tool which was then discarded as it seemed to exist only to provide the means for ending narration of the game (which was abandoned anyway).

This is followed by a round of hide-and-seek, Charles Lee acting like a parody of every stereotypical "racist-white-man" villain in any media and an admittedly powerful scene of the death of Kaniehtí:io (this scene alone saved the entire first memories of Ratonhnhaké:ton's section along with how it was actually kinda fun seeing a happy childhood memory till it all went to hell).

I would say spoilers, but if you are reading this, you have probably played the game.

So, after this not so brief summary, these are some ways in which the story could have been improved in terms of plot, pacing, visuals and gameplay. Here we go-

Ditch the opening narration

Not only does it not reveal anything you wouldn't know by playing the game, the exposition dump also confuses new players who just want to run around in trees and chop up redcoats. Being a Native American Freedom Fighter for them doesn't sound right in a story which starts with evil corporations and end-of-the-world scenarios. This infuriates me further when I consider that the ending had to be removed to make space for filler like this.

Also, the first time you can take control of the character is when he is entering a cave, and collapses. That's it. The pointlessness of this is astounding. Seeing how often the action was littered with cut-scenes it would have been far better if the entire portion was just a continuous cut-scene so that we can just watch it or skip it if we choose to do so and get on with the actual game. It might sound in contrary to my above rant on the overuse of cut-scenes, but this one would barely last half a minute if done right and would neatly fill in the gaps from the previous game for newcomers and other players alike. Desmond uses the apple, enters the cave with friends and family, collapses from visions and so he is put into the animus. 30 seconds? Done!

Ditch the prologue focusing on Haytham.

People might argue about how we are losing the plot twist, the sense of comparison between father-and-son, the grey morality introduced in the story, and also Haytham's charming company. However, I would point out that by this point, anybody who would buy a re-release of this game probably already knows about the twist ending. So including this is basically making them play a restricted version of the game for a plot-twist they already know. Also, for the other points, please read the next suggestion.

Use the diaries as a story element.

In the earlier game, we see Haytham aboard the ship writing in his diary. The diary is how he narrates the story in the novelisation. The diary was also supposed to be included in the ending based on recovered audio. So how come it has been used so little in the game? The best answer is technical limitations and the worst is sloppy design (no offence intended to the Ubisoft dev. team, but problems like these are not exactly rare). So, use the diaries as a mission point, not unlike how in Origins when Bayek hears a man tell a tale about a sea-battle in which his wife had commanded, only for the player to actually end up taking part in the battle. That was very well done and AC3 re-mastered or redone should follow the example set. If in a meta-sense any fan might complain about how the version of the animus used didn't support such features, the story team can reply on how the data was transmitted via. the temple and Juno, not directly through Desmond's memories. This would also provide a lot more freedom to the story writers of future games as the present-day character wouldn't have to be genetically linked to the past character, or have a scrap of their DNA. The temple can function as the memory warehouse with the Animus being a dispenser.

Finding the Homestead

Now we get to the meat of the story, the start of the brooding loner who grows up into an angry loner with a penchant for chopping up anybody wearing red. Here is my first suggestion here, are you ready? Well, here goes, CUT IT OUT! That's right, but before anybody tries to take my head for chopping off these precious indispensable story missions involving climbing trees with your best friend (fat joke with best friend averted), hunting squirrels and rescuing said friend from a river, they don't really push the story forward and it would be better to visit them later for some warm fuzzy nostalgic feeling, but with more village and friend bonding and less tutorials.

Now, this is when we SHOULD get to the start of the game; when Oiá:ner lets Ratonhnhaké:ton first talk to Juno. It's unique and frankly if you had just got rid of the annoying side objectives here, quite enjoyable too. Seriously, the designer who inserted those side missions should be sacked. It's like putting captions for every single scene in 2001: A Space Odyssey; let the visuals speak for themselves. When you're a hologram, hitting virtual branches shouldn't matter. Also, like in 2001, it is necessary at times, but certainly not in their version of going through the wormhole (the nexus) to become a Star Child (spirit eagle).

So we start the quest by leaving our home, and venturing to the great unknown? Sounds awesome. I was tempted to say include a cut-scene, but by proper handling of the event (say not teleporting the character to a rock face for no reason with him monologuing over it) in the game by its atmosphere, movement and gameplay, it can be done far better. Just let him walk away slowly from the village as Oiá:ner looks on, with a setting sun and the theme music in the background. Let the visuals tell the story.

THIS is where the tutorial can shine. Let's see what we can do:

Ratonhnhaké:ton wants to get a better view of the surroundings so he climbs a tree (the tall one which was present in one of the first Frontiersmen mission, not the god awful twisted maze-like ones) to get a better view (synchronizing? Done). But with no leap of faith. He is not an Assassin. Yet.

Ratonhnhaké:ton grows hungry, so he hunts some deer and rabbits to eat and saves the rest for later use (hunting mechanics explained)

Wolves are attracted to the scent so he has to climb a tree (tree running? Done!)

A branch breaks, so he falls and has to defend himself (QTE in a tense atmosphere with one of the most dangerous animals around? Done.)

However, he becomes wounded and passes out (he's still a kid, so it is to be expected)

He is found by a travelling merchant (introductions are done, also switch it here to first person as it is technically his memories we're viewing as he's being carried in the back of the cart) and taken to the Token Black family of Davenport; Warren and Prudence who nurse him back to health.

Adult humour aside, I have a legitimate reason for the last one. This act of kindness by complete strangers would soften his view against settlers as "the enemy", something which would serve him well later on. Also, in the homestead introduction missions, they had no proper intro cause. Let me elaborate:

Terry and Godfrey were ignorant trespassers to Davenport who later settled with permission.

Lance was attacked by bandits on the border

Miriam was wounded on the grounds by a poacher

Norris is an exception (though I have something planned here)

Dr Lyle was specifically requested by Warren and Prudence

Oliver and Corrine were down on their luck former innkeepers who were looking for a profitable location. Surprise, surprise, they settled when found one.

Father Timothy was a wandering priest, so it's not that unusual once an inn was set up

Ellen wasn't found directly, rather her daughter decided to take the help of a complete stranger on the street dressed like a walking arsenal so that he could beat up her father. Clever girl.

Big Dave is another fluke. However, it is more forgivable here since Ratonhnhaké:ton has repeatedly shown to rescue soldiers who are about to be executed. So he was basically staying in character.

So, this is what I meant when there was no intro story. Had there been no icon on the map, it would have been by sheer dumb luck that they would be rescued. This randomness is expected in life, but unacceptable in a game which is supposed to be a simulation of a fully-lived life. So by turning them into acquaintances, it would make sense why their location would be known. It would also give him a stronger reason to visit them say... after rumours start floating of "evictions" done by redcoats against settler populations. Just my thoughts.

A Boorish Man

I honestly have no complaints about this mission. True, that he sounds rather whiny and the stalking does get tedious, but after nearly losing his life in the earlier mission, could you expect him to be anything but stubborn?

Also, just as a side note, the greatest Assassin's Creed fanfic series; the novelizations by Mirror and Image have a supplemental short story of this mission from Achilles' point of view. I would rather burn the homestead down than change that to be non-canon. Seriously, their stories actually exceed the source materials in both quality and quantity.

s/9992043/1/A-Boorish-Man

The missions remain unchanged, but by showing Ratonhnhaké:ton being injured, it could justify why he didn't hear the last bandit sneaking up on him as his mind was clouded by the pain.

Let the story continue with the chair breaking slapstick humour, the badass promise of kinslaying, but please cut out the monologues.

This video  watch?v=jWhY-NTpU-I

tears apart all the inconsistencies of the speeches made and honestly, I agree with them on that at least. Just restrain yourself from trying to strangle the narrator. He sounds like a twit.

Then they visit Boston, a coloured man with a bag of money and a half-native in a stately carriage, what could go wrong?

Welcome to Boston

When we enter Boston, in this version it would be our first time so Ratonhnhaké:ton's sense of wonder would be relatable for us. They have a speech explaining how Ratonhnhaké:ton got his adopted name Connor, though I question having such a discussion in the middle of a city. Then Achilles gives the native boy the cash and sends him off to a city which he has never set foot in before, a real father of the year material.

After this, we get better advice from the kindly shopkeeper followed by a sight of our enigmatic biological father. Due to him being mentioned only from the outsider's point of view, newcomers won't know what to expect from him, though instigating the Boston Massacre might change that.

Here we get an intro to the classic tailing missions, something which was completely pointless in the original game, seeing that we have been tailing and stabbing for hours at this point. Now, however, it gains relevance. Also, let there be alternate paths here, with Connor being able to choose between tailing on the ground, stalking from the roof while hiding from British lookouts (preferably those without X-ray vision) or use the crowds to his advantage and move with the flow.

Then comes the shot which changed the world (not the one heard 'round the world) and now, Connor is a fugitive. The completely contrived way in which he was somehow put in contact with Sam Adams and was introduced to the fancy backdrop… I mean the window dressing… I mean really, the historical setting really fails to hold up the suspension of disbelief.

So… here's a re-write. Connor is hounded on all sides, he has no allies to turn to and he might be dead by morning, so in an act of desperation, he decides to get to the Templars or die trying. So he sneaks through the back roads and side alleys of Boston and makes his way to the Green Dragon Tavern.

Note: the shop-keeper gives him a bloody map of Boston before sending him to wander off, something which the venerable, wise, old-man didn't bother to do so. Seriously, this is less a question of game development and also more to do with common sense. Also on another side note, a pop-up map which can be used in the first-person view, akin to the one in Far Cry 2 will be awesome. It can take the form of a sheath of papers or a small notebook which Connor flips through to switch between places and views.

In the tavern, he fails to find the Templars, but somebody else manages to find him instead. Here we are introduced to Surry (what the hell Ubisoft? Where the hell was she?) who manages to convince him that if he wants to survive, he should follow her. It has now become a requirement of the game at this point that whenever Sam Adams starts spouting rhetoric about Freedom, Connor should shut him up by reminding him of Surry. Here, we see her smuggling him through the underground network, where Connor diligently marks the location of every locked door, puzzle room and entrance/exit he finds. This will allow the player to skip all the soul-crushing walking and get directly to the puzzle rooms or locked doors on further explorations. Players can still explore at will, though this won't be necessary due to a few other additions which will be spoken of later. At the end of the day, he crashes into a spare bed in Sam's house and both the character and player can rest after a challenging stealth mission.

Now as promised, here is how you fix the underground missions

Make them puzzle focused. The puzzles were honestly the only interesting parts of this section and honestly, letting players just skip to that would be an improvement.

Exploration is optional. For people with a coma fetish, the option of stumbling through dark corridors with a lantern is still an option. However, by rewarding the players by revealing the map and revealing the puzzle points (obstacles and exits/entrances), the player can just skip to them. If an obstacle exists between the player and an entrance/exit, however, the player can't just teleport out of the way. Only by clearing the puzzle will the path be cleared and the entrance/exit puzzle made available. This will prevent players spamming by revealing the entrances by purchasing maps, teleporting there and solving the puzzles that way. This game shouldn't tolerate laziness, on both sides.

Exploration should be rewarded. Old cities tend to have a lot of fascinating stuff buried underground and Boston and New York shouldn't be any exceptions. After all, cities built on a foundation of the blood of the indigenous people would have some cool shit under it. Whether it be forgotten graves (poignant and heart-breaking last words recommended) to remains of older buildings, even say… a sunken ship or the stumps of ancient trees to old freemason chambers, all should be available underground. Also, upon full exploration of the underground, let Connor be allowed to keep a magic lantern as a souvenir. It looks neat and he should get the bragging rights.

A new class of missions, the Underground will reward such maps of the underground, which can be superimposed on the map of the surface. What these missions entail will be expanded later.

Put more variety on the entrances. The only variety I saw was one whose entrance was hidden in a well. A well would be harder to get into than a cellar entrance. How about a cupboard with a secret back in the Green Dragon itself which leads to the underground? A secret door under one of the bridges? So many possibilities… more of that please.

After this, there is the mission where we remove the notoriety. Sam Adams acts as a walking tutorial while Connor asks a dumb question. Nothing can be done here, but let me alter the mechanics a bit. Here we go-

The notoriety system should be based on area rather than a meter. Instead of having a notoriety bar attached to the player, the region in line-of-sight within a certain range of where any such murderous activity was performed becomes an immediate three star-red zone. Red zone sizes are determined by the size of the region where they occurred and the line of sight. Areas like the Old State House should have large red zones, but in the middle of crowds, a skilled enough player can murder in public and slink away before the body is found.

After a certain period of time, the area bordering the red zones turn one-star yellow whereas the red zones turn to two-stars orange. As Connor at this time is in the yellow zone and in disguise, he isn't immediately killed outright. Its shape should be dependent on the shape of the red zone and the layout of the city. This can be explained with the fact that the news was spreading and over time with Connor remaining at large, it would be assumed that he escaped the clutches of the redcoats in the red zone so the search had been expanded while the red zone becomes calmer as it is believed that he might have escaped.

On a third stage, a wider circle is now affected, but now they are all yellow. This means that as long as the player stays out of sight and doesn't do anything stupid, the player should be safe. While waiting for the first cool-down is a necessity if one is trapped in the red zone, the second is optional as with some skill and luck, one can escape an orange zone unscathed.

For eradication of notoriety, posters remove it only for that of the specific area. Different regions have their own poster areas whose locations will be tagged on a map upon finding, or by purchasing a map. They will re-appear in case of notoriety.

Bribing town criers and presses is another option which reduces notoriety for wider areas (though not all of it in larger cases), but repeated spamming will cause suspicion among authorities who will start posting guards. So, it is advised to stop using the same location multiple times in succession to allow for cooldowns. Also, completing underground missions should let you bribe urchins to tear down posters for you.

Once this is done, let's return to Davenport.

Becoming an Assassin

Now, after a rather understandable rant by Connor towards the neglecting mentor, he gets the hood. However, rather than just skipping tradition altogether, they repeat the words of the creed with the music in the background, bringing a tear to the eye of any long-term fan and letting the shade of Ed Kenway rest, knowing that his legacy is (somewhat) preserved in his grandson.

Now here's the mission with Davenport's classic comic relief; Terry and Godfrey. Great mission, with only one suggestion; make it so that the freezing cold water of the river can actually cause hypothermia upon continuous exposure and desynchronization. This is a legitimate reason for the secondary objective of not touching the water and doesn't break the illusion. Also, remove the backdrop of dangerous animals along the riverbanks as I can't help but wonder, how on earth did an overweight middle-aged man like Godfrey catch up to us unarmed and with all his arms attached when there are WOLVES along the banks of the river.

Then the mission with Lance, who is introduced when they hear what appears to be faint screaming in the distance and Connor being the hero he is, can't let the call go unanswered. Before we go along to the world's most expensive tea party later, let us first talk about the gear of an Assassin.

When Connor is first introduced, his entire gear consists of a bow and some arrows, a tomahawk and a knife (dual-wielded in combat), some snares and bait. However, there would be a logical looking system-of-progression here. The most awesome looking weapon in the game shouldn't be the base level weapon. So let's redo it.

Connor starts off during training with a stone knife and tomahawk and a simple hunting bow. During training, he was awarded with a flintlock pistol (just one, guns aren't toys) and nothing else. This makes the first mission in Boston a survival mission with limited gear and possibly for the only time in the story, an entire city in the red zone. Upon gaining the hood, he is upgraded to an iron tomahawk which can be thrown and instantly picked up based on proximity and hidden blades which take the place of the previous knife. This will also allow the usage of other gear such as smoke bombs and poison darts, but restraint here is key. The upgrading mechanism will be a topic for another section so let's leave it here.

Now, onto Boston again.

The Mad-Hatter's wet dream

The first thing I would like to say is; you aged up Connor too fast! One moment ago he was still a teenager, but in a span of few months, he has ended up looking like an Indian (Asian Indians, from India) salaryman in his 30s. Pace yourself Ubisoft, pace yourself. The humour involving the stuck tomahawk is funny, but the ending to that scene could have been handled better, with Achilles instead reluctantly agreeing to let him do due to his unspoken admiration for the fact that Connor understood the sanctity of life, even that of his enemies. It could go as shown in the game with a few tweaks, the introduction to Stephane, him journeying with Kanen'tó:kon who fears that he is turning to the dark side and the ultimate failure of diplomacy resulting in both of them agreeing to help the S.O.L in their acts of sabotage.

Now, here is where my biggest source of rage in the game is to be corrected. I can barely restrain myself so here it is; the entire Tea Party mission, WAS THE BIGGEST INSULT TO FANS AND NEWCOMERS OF THE SERIES! NOT ONLY IS IT HISTORICALLY INNACURATE TO THE POINT THAT IT LOOKS LIKE A HOLLYWOOD SHLOCK PRODUCT, BUT THE ACTUAL GAMEPLAY IS SO BUGGY, ESPECIALLY DURING THE TEA DUMPING SECTION AS THAT I SERIOUSLY CONTEMPLATED JUST ERASING THE GAME AND STOPPING ALTOGETHER. THE COUNTER WAS BROKEN AS APPARENTLY WATER FROM ONE SIDE OF THE SHIP IS DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHER AND SOMEHOW COUNTED AS DRY LAND. THE DECISIONS MADE IN ITS EXECUTION MAKE IT LOOK LIKE SOMEBODY MISTOOK IT FOR A MODDED GTA GAME AND RAN WITH IT. ALSO, THE SIDE OBJECTIVES WERE COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS AND SEEMED LIKE THEY WERE MADE ON A DARE BY THE DEVs JUST TO SEE HOW FAR THE PLAYERS WIL GO AND JUMP THROUGH HOOPS JUST FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETION. THIS WAS HORRIBLE!

That felt good. Apologies for the outburst, so let's move on. Connor takes out the guards quietly, as a stealthy mission should (especially for an act which was supposed to have at least started in secrecy) and with bonus sync points for doing it non-lethally as the red coats were just doing their job after all. After that, comes the mayhem. While the rest of your playmates are busy flushing the plants down the drain, you patrol the area and take out key British patrols by drawing them into ambushes, baiting them away and so-on (same non-lethal bonuses apply). Once they're done, you go back and are given the last crate of tea, which you drop right in front of the Templars who are watching you, the 18th century equivalent of a mic-drop. . .

Your first time

No good deed goes unpunished however, as now you have to go-and-kill William Johnson. I can't go any further than this however, as I have to instead refer to the Assassin's Creed 3 novelization done by Mirror and Image for this section. It is honestly so good that nothing I write can match it and as I have said before, it exceeds the source material. Here's the link:

s/10944184/11/AC3-Novelization

enjoy.

Honestly, go read it. If you can spend your time reading this, it could be better spent reading ↑ that instead. But do come back to this later.

The midnight ride

It was infuriating the first time as I was quite literally stumbling in the dark. The second time however, it was hilarious after I learnt to stay on the path. It is still no excuse for keeping it here, so just give Revere his own horse and let him keep some dignity here. Also, this will essentially make Connor a scout who acts a lookout against British patrols and who can signal to follow or stop (this system has worked before with Haytham and Lee and with Connor and Lance later on, so it should work here).

The double teaming on a horse doesn't happen as Paul's horse is shot by the redcoats in the ambush and Connor gives him his while he holds them off. However, as he becomes overwhelmed, he spots one of their tethered horses and makes a run for it, catching up to Paul outside of Prescott's house for the 'hilarity' to follow. There, that fixes the third most annoying mission in the game.

Soldiers and War

People were a bit upset about how little a role Connor played on the front-lines, just shouting fire atop a horse, running away on a horse and not getting to use a horse to charge at the front lines as in the trailer. Though understandable about the frustration at the misleading marketing, in the end; the marketing campaign was doing what it was paid to do, hype-up a new game. What really irritated me was how half-assed it actually was and how much it didn't tie in to how Assassin's act.

They are supposed to work from the dark (it's literally the job description) and avoid the front lines, like any spy or assassin (the real-life types) would. The charging across front lines seems to be something they would only do when cornered or in any other situations of last resort, like during the Templar siege of Masyaf. So as much as it might anger the players, here's my suggestion;

Keep him away from the front lines and let him act as an assassin. If you want a historical FPS war re-enactment, play Battlefield 1. This is an Assassin's Creed game so let it be an Assassin's Creed game. So, in Lexington, Connor prepares to assassinate Pitcairn during the confrontation and properly end the war before it begins, only for the "shot heard round the world" to cause all hell to break loose. There is no subterfuge here, just some idiot soldier with an over itchy trigger finger, like how such things tend to happen.

Connor now doesn't go running off as a bloody message-boy who rescues POW's who are being executed IN THE MIDDLE OF A RETREAT (seriously? Who came up with that?), and instead decides to hunker down and wait for the army to pass. As they pass, he overhears the officers mentioning their plans of attack, thereby giving him the same information he had in the original game and then decides to rescue some POWs and uses the distraction caused to escape and deliver the information. Here is also a good source of conflict, as his original goals of assassinating Pitcairn, now come into conflict with his goals of preventing further bloodshed by warning the colonial militia of the impending massacre. He chooses to save several lives instead of taking one, thereby embroiling himself into the war and explains why he actually cares about this new nation of white men as he has actually played a significant role early on in its founding.

Cannons and Hills

If there ever was a general point of failure of AC3, it had to be in its execution of historical events. Bunker Hill might have been an exception but… Wilhelm Scream. Before I add anything more, let me stress this out, it is not a request, it is an ORDER. If anyone in Ubisoft uses ANYTHING from here, just get rid of the Wilhelm Scream in the cut scene with Putnam. It is so distracting that I would half expect Storm Troopers to come in and perform a slapstick routine.

Even Putnam sounds like he agrees with me. Just listen to the line he utters after the scream.

watch?v=red8TGCf3p4

Now back to point.

The disabling of the cannons is dumb because it seems to rely on the same kind of logic that "lightning never strikes twice in the same place." After all the time they spent in talking about "secret passageways", this didn't occur to them? This is how you fix it:

To start the mission, Connor must first unlock the underground tunnel systems present in Charlestown, just like in most American cities at the time which were abandoned during the Assassin purges. How does he know of this? Because Achilles figures that they can be useful and actually TELLS him about them, because there are better things for American Yoda to do than look grumpy. Now, for the mission to begin, Connor knows about the secret passageways and uses them to sneak towards the harbour because:

He can't compromise valuable Assassin intel

He doesn't want to risk lives

Panicked soldiers in a racist time aren't likely to trust a half-native American dressed like a Robin Hood cosplayer

Friendly AI is just infuriating, so keep them away.

At the end, he swims towards them and continues the mission. While this is less cinematic, it has the advantage of being… sane.

Just to end the first part of this mission, remove the unnecessary secondary objectives and give the player the freedom to choose how to dispatch the guards on deck. The only restriction being, that you can't be seen. After all, what's life without a few challenges?

Now, for the cinematic trailer mission, keep the formula from the first game. Seriously, thought it might be quite frustrating, it does capture the hopelessness of war quite well and I wouldn't change it. Except for one thing; the actual assassination. This is what was believed to be "stealthy":

watch?v=9TVhGn0Ji-8

Circling a command center to climb a tree, to jump on another tree, to jump on a flag pole, to jump on an old man from the flag pole in broad daylight to stab him in the neck (I think).

Instead, let Connor infiltrate the region after disguising himself as a body-guard (the gear is stashed away except for the hidden blades) and visits Pitcairn in the tent and he kills him there. This makes the confession scene make sense to how they weren't interrupted and allows for a stealthy escape. Players can try to come in Tomahawks swinging and with a lucky hit you might kill Pitcairn, but you would just get a volley of lead shot in your face for your troubles.

If anyone still has a problem that it doesn't match the trailer, just make a new one, a cinematic trailer similar to that of the first two games. After all, if there's one thing people don't get sick of, it's more trailers.

After this, we'll visit New York.

End of Part One.


	2. Chapter 2: Signs of failure in movies

Signs of failure (critical, if not popular or box-office) in an adaptation or sequel:

1) Disrespecting the source

 **Assassin's Creed:** The subtle and thematic music, especially noticeable in the Ezio trilogy, 3 and Black Flag was replaced with some modern crap. It marred the trailers and it was a clear warning sign. Also, this franchise had the guts to call-out America's founding fathers in a game set in America on their hypocrisy. The movie uses Hollywood History in making Columbus a hero and the Inquisition into a parody of itself.

 **Historical movies (1492: The conquest of paradise, The Patriot, Braveheart):** There is no bigger source than our own history. Here, 1492 is basically a poorly-made attempt at revisionism, The Patriot is american propaganda which was pulled out of the 40's and Braveheart doesn't qualify as such because it ended up being hated in the country it was trying to praise. Imagine if Ridley Scott had made a historical movie in the same vein as 1492 at ANY other point in world history; if it was set during the second world war, it would be a film of holocaust denial, during territorial expansion, he would have been jerking off to manifest destiny and if it was set in Colonial Congo, he would have written the natives as zombies to justify having the white people chop off some limbs and heads. the patriot is the LEAST offensive of the three, by which I mean it portrays the British as being one-dimensional villains. When there was a statue of Mel Gibson as William Wallace in Scotland they had to have it fenced in and later replaced as it was repeatedly vandalised :).

2) Jarring music from the original

 **Men In Black: International:** This example can be easily switched out with the above and vice-versa. In the trailer, they play the original theme just to raise our hopes, then they destroy it with something which sounds like shit and would just as quickly be forgotten. This is an especially bad case so the next three examples will be from this as well.

3) Knee-Jerk casting and/or whitewashing:

 **Men In Black: International:** They chose the first popular actors anybody would recognize from ANOTHER sci-fi action comedy. the first Men-In-Black movie didn't need that. It certainly wasn't advertised as a buddy-cop movie between Thaddeus Stevens and Muhammad Ali. The casting looks desperate at best and to their credit, the actor and actress involved are memorable. Unfortunately, they are the only things that are.

 **Ghost in the Shell:** To paraphrase "Honest Trailers" the casting for the main here is basically the act of shooting one's foot, missing it and double tapping-it just to ensure death by lead poisoning.

 **Exodus Gods and Kings:** The Ten Commandments could be excused based on their age. During an era-of-segregation, it wasn't exactly uncommon. The Prince of Egypt was animated, a branch where people of any gender or ethnicity can play any other gender or ethnicity. THIS on the other hand, has no excuse, and the director's justifications don't help matters either. More on that later. Gods of Egypt doesn't count as it really isn't based on any previous works and most Egyptian gods had animal parts and overall it is STILL a pretty boring film.

4) A clear grab at money

 **Men In Black: International/Robin Hood:** Nobody asked for this and judging from the trailer reactions, nobody really wanted it. It released, and failed and nobody cares.

5) Bizarre choice in creative team:

 **Men In Black: International:** Directed by the car behind the Fast and Furious 7. No disrespect meant, but a jump from a long-running family-drama/racing film series to a reboot of one of the most iconic sci-fi action/comedy movie series is a big leap, and the landing was terrible. SOME directors can do it, James Wan, the horror director for instance made a big splash with Aquaman, though that was helped with the great degree of freedom permitted in comparison to the other films of the DCEU and the fact that people loved the trailers, he clearly had a vision for this in mind, a smooth production and being more than a blatant cash grab.

 **Zack Snyder's DCEU films:** To be completely honest, I respect the guy. He's no Christopher Nolan, but he does have a love for Superheroes. He's a flawed director but he does put effort into it, that earns him my respect and judging from the clamour for the release of the Justice League's Snyder cut, many other people do so too. THE PROBLEM comes with the extenuating circumstances i.e. the studio and writer. Zack Snyder has his own "style" when it comes to visuals, and even in his lesser works, it is memorable to say the least. His weakness however, comes in the story. When he is adapting sources like "Watchmen" or "300" this isn't noticeable as he follows the comic to film conversion with a faithfulness which bothers on obsession and what he does cut out (e.g. the squid subplot) are agreeable, except to the die-hard purists (though they don't have much of credibility because of this). However, as it was seen in films like "BvS", when it's own writer, David apparently mocked this very idea in the past and after being effectively hamstrung by the studio into decimating the film's run time, is it really that surprising? Considering the restrictions, unless the director was someone who was willing to physically beat up some executives, the movies would have NEVER met the expectations set on them. When Justice league trailer were released, thanks to Wonder Woman there was hope. Then Snyder had to leave due to a family tragedy and WB had a knee-jerk casting reaction, this time for a director. They took the director of the PREVIOUS successful cinematic universe, which was almost COMPLETELY tonally different from Justice League and who had once tried to make a major motion picture with a grimmer tone, giving us Alien: Resurrection. The end result was a film which would give a Xenomorph a run for its money by how it seemed to defy good sense. Batfleck was now a butt-monkey, Superman has a creepier smile than Jared Leto and there is now an abundance of low-angle shots of Wonder Woman, one of the few female comic book characters today which against-all-odds wasn't needlessly sexualized thanks to a female director. It failed, and I'm glad it failed. The era of dark films has passed again and all I have to say is that it was a wasted opportunity.

6) Addressing controversy:

ALL MEDIA, when they have something relevant to say, they will be divisive, controversial and to many anvillicious. However, if they do not compromise on their message and are willing to stand by it, even the ones who disagree, provided that they are sane, will respect them, if only grudgingly.

Wolfenstein: The new colossus did not pull any punches with it's depiction of Nazis, the KKK and bigots in general. It's detractors have many names for it: a leftist-propaganda, a cry for publicity, unwanted social commentary and a bunch more. The developer's response, was to buckle down and face the issue head on and give us a game where you can kick Hitler in the face once he's done pissing himself and calling for his mother. It was great, Honest Game Trailers pointed out that it did what was impossible for most shooters, make us give a damn about the story and characters and it is by far the best part of the game.

Doctor Strange was accused of whitewashing by replacing the ancient one's character from an old Tibetian man to a Celtic woman. It responded by pointing out that China wasn't a fan of Tibet. It basically addressed it by saying that YES, there was whitewashing but it was done in the name of pragmatism (greed) and not bigotry. It's not perfect, but compare to the example for the next point, it is far better.

 **Far Cry 5:** It used religious fundamentalists as the villains and after Far Cry 4's rather vague but interesting commentary, there was a lot of expectations for Far Cry 5. The criticisms came and Ubisoft bowed to pressure. Needless to say, Far Cry 5 was dissapointing in how tame and generic it was.

7) Dissing criticism

 **The Last Jedi:** Rian Johnson MIGHT be remembered as the guy who broke the Star Wars movie franchise for the second time, especially seeing the returns on "Solo". the Last Jedi has A LOT of problems, not the least of which is the idiot ball holding characters, idiot plot moments and the disappointing handling of deaths. In comparison, Batman and Robin (yes, really) is better in one regard. When it sunk the Batman movie franchise, the director Joel Shumacher himself apologised for disappointing people and said that his goal was just to make a friendlier version of the character and seeing how the 60's Batman was still in memory when the first of these movies rolled-out it makes some sense. You can hate the movie, but if you have all the facts, including how the studio was basically strong-arming them into taking this route and how disillusioned he grew at the end, you can't hate the man. In comparison, Johnson's response to criticism was to whine like a little baby and throw out the term "subverted expectations" like it was his safe word. The movie certainly managed that, I expected to see an awesome movie but instead now I have a better appreciation for Rogue One: The last good Star Wars movie.

 **Exodus Gods and Kings:** This movie was accused of whitewashing, and Ridley Scott in all his wisdom made a tasteless joke about how hiring someone named "Muhammad so-and-so" wouldn't give him the views. He must have had one of his idiot moments as it seems that he had forgotten that most people wouldn't be able to name the guy playing Rameses with a gun to their head unless they had access to Imdb. It had access to Christian Bale however, and it failed. Good riddance.

Bonus) Subverting expectations

Mad Max:Fury Road and Avengers:Infinity War did it right because the death of Angharad and Max's failure to escape in the beginning in the former and the snap in the latter made sense in their own universe's context and it was earned.

Game of Thrones in its earlier seasons at least did so as well for the same reasons.

 **The Last Jedi:** This was Rian Johnson's safe word for every criticism lobbied at the film. Even "How It Should Have Ended" mocked it by showing their version of how it could have ended which with all honesty is FAR better than the movie version. The problem isn't that it attempts to subvert expectations, it's that the term is used to justify or excuse bad writing and logic. The earlier examples managed to do so because they respected and understood the logic and rules of their own universe. This one doesn't. He claims to want to avoid clichés but by the mishandling here, has made it worse. Yes, the movie which wants to be original and free of old clichés is a bad movie riddled with all new ones. Inventing new mechanics (fuel) without a hint of their relevance in the previous ones just to drive the plot forward, idiot ball moments by both story and characters for the same reason (take your pick), one dimensional characters created solely to pander to a demographic or ideology (Holdo) but end up being hated, removing a meaningful payoff in the name of "subverting expectations" (take your pick, though fans DID respond in kind by not showing up in cinemas for the next one, removing the payoff in the form of revenue that was expected :)), destroying emotional moments in the name of the same (Luke tossing the lightsaber over his shoulder. He could have instead portrayed being disillusioned by returning it, breaking it, or even recoiling in touch and it would have worked instead of treating it like a joke. Also, it works as an example for removing payoff as well) and sequel baiting (the ending). Yes the prequels were bad, but George Lucas was clearly trying to make something new and apparently child friendly. When it didn't work, he shifted focus and it can be clearly seen by the point of "Revenge of the Sith". This film claims to better but fails just as bad if not worse. The prequels LOOK like a cartoon, and the actual cartoon series did redeem it somewhat. The Last Jedi doesn't; it looks like a continuation of the original, and yet it is so badly warped here that it is far below any of the prequels or the originals. It wanted to be better than any of them, but because of its MANY MANY problems, to me it will always be the worst.

 **Game of Thrones Season 7 and 8:** The previous post was REALLY long, and this has been discussed to death in other places, so no need to beat a dead horse here. However,I would like to add a point. At the end of Season 7, I proclaimed that it was one the worst season at the time and that I was worried it would grow worse. Every GoT fan in the vicinity disagreed and defended it with almost religious zeal. Season 8 then came along and by the third episode, the people I saw were broken. It was then, that I experienced first-hand, the feeling of Schadenfreude. :)

That will be all. P.S. Should I include the above in my collection of essays?

My list of rules:  
1) I will try to not print any story with characters who in any way stray from the original form as far as humanly possible (most of the time)  
2) Characters whose personalities are many sided and open to interpretation have some lee-way  
3) If a source material is by its very nature style-over-substance, a change in tone might be necessary and so any warnings will be posted ahead of the story.  
4) Ideas will be given out on a separate work which will serve like a testing field. Based on approval and my personal preference, choices will follow.  
5) No unnecessary sexualizing of characters or cursing. That is a hallmark of ineptitude.  
6) Due to a hectic schedule, regular updates may not be possible.  
7) Only reviews which have something relevant to contribute will be acknowledged. The rest will be ignored.  
8) **Main characters can die here.** If anybody is a fan of the indestructible protagonist, this is not the place for you.


End file.
